CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 décembre 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .s1DE04B9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } Published on 19 January 2026   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 13754/25 K.A. against Türkiye lodged on 8 April 2025 communicated on 16 December 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the order for applicant’s expulsion on national ‑ security grounds to a safe third country or his voluntary return to his country of origin. The applicant is a 24-year-old Syrian national who fled to Türkiye in 2013 with his family as a result of acts of indiscriminate violence. On 28 April 2022 the Bursa Prosecutor’s Office initiated a criminal investigation against the applicant for his alleged involvement with ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and al‑Sham). These proceedings were discontinued on 6   July 2022. On 15 May 2024 the Bursa Governor’s Office issued a decision ordering the applicant’s deportation from Türkiye on the basis of a G-87 restriction code which had been imposed on the applicant because he was considered as posing threat to the public order and security. In the deportation order, it was established that the applicant can be deported to Ecuador, the safe third country, or he can voluntarily return to Syria. The applicant lodged an appeal against the deportation order claiming that it was unlawful, and that the imposition of the G-87 code was unfounded, and that he had not engaged in any illegal activities. He also submitted that, if returned, he would face a risk of death or persecution as there had been an ongoing civil war in Syria and that he was a Turkmen who had deserted the army and that his father had been killed by the regime. On 23 October 2024 the Bursa Administrative Court dismissed his case for the annulment of the deportation order on the grounds that his removal to Syria could only be carried out on a voluntary basis and that he failed to demonstrate a personal and concrete threat against him in Ecuador. In the parallel proceedings instituted by the applicant for the annulment of the G-87 code, the Ankara Administrative Court, by a judgment of 17   October 2024, held that the measure had been imposed on the basis of a letter from the Police Intelligence Department, pursued, inter alia , the aim of preventing terrorist activities, and protecting national security, and fell within the prerogatives of the State authorities. On 20 November 2024 Turkish Constitutional Court rejected the applicant’s interim measure request to suspend his deportation, and on 7   February 2025 and on 17 March 2025, respectively, declared his individual applications regarding the above administrative proceedings inadmissible. On 6 June 2025 the Court rejected the applicant’s interim measure request under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. The applicant complains under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention that he would be subjected to death or inhumane and degrading treatment, if deported and that the domestic authorities failed to conduct an adequate “safe third country” assessment, particularly with regard to the risk of chain refoulement to Syria.         QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Is the applicant currently under a threat of removal to Ecuador or to Syria? If so, would this entail a real risk that he would be subjected to treatment in violation of Articles 2 and/or 3 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary [GC], no. 47287/15, §§ 139-150, 21   November 2019; J.K. and Others v. Sweden [GC], no. 59166/12, §   77 ‑ 123, 23   August 2016; S.H.H. v. the United Kingdom , no. 60367/10, §   69-95, 29   January 2013; A.A. v. Switzerland , no. 32218/17, §§ 39-59, 5   November 2019; and M.A. and Others v. Bulgaria , no. 5115/18, §§ 68-84, 20   February 2020)?   2.     Did the domestic authorities’ decision to consider Ecuador as a “safe third country” and to order the applicant’s expulsion towards that country expose him to a real risk of being subjected to death or ill-treatment? In particular, did domestic authorities and courts conduct an adequate examination of the question whether Ecuador’s asylum procedure affords sufficient guarantees to avoid the applicant being arbitrarily removed, directly or indirectly, to his country of origin without a proper evaluation of the risks he faces from the standpoint of Article 2 and/or 3 of the Convention ( see, Auad v. Bulgaria , no. 46390/10, § 106, 11 October 2011 ; Ilias and Ahmed , cited above, §§ 139-150, and mutatis mutandis , M.S.S. v.   Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, §§ 283 and 358, ECHR 2011)?   The parties are requested to submit a copy of all documents pertinent to the deportation, including any risk assessment conducted by the domestic authorities concerning the potential risks to the applicant upon removal to Ecuador.   In particular, the Government is requested to submit a copy of all documents relating to the scope and content of the safe third country assessment form dated 15 May 2024 and issued by the Directorate General of Migration Management.